CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics, Motorsport, Formula 1

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 11:25 am

Anyone here have any experience with ICEM? I've been using Gambit for a few years but its about time I moved on...

Anyone here willing to answer a few questions I may have?
PNSD
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2006

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 11:56 am

Sure, I can try and help..
miqi23
 
Joined: 11 Feb 2006

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 12:02 pm

YEPPPPP !!!
Speedster , dribbler , free kick taker ,complete forward .
mahesh248f1
 
Joined: 31 Oct 2011

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 3:39 pm

kilcoo316 wrote:Renault built their own code, one of the guys did it went through QUB a few years before me.

A real, real smart man.


I think Renault and Boeing have a thing going now regarding computational methods.


[I had thought Renault and Airbus were involved in CFD in the past... :? ]

I think Lamborghini and Boeing share some computational systems and methodologies for advanced composites.
Just_a_fan
 
Joined: 31 Jan 2010

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 4:15 pm

As far as I know

Reanault use starccm+ (commercial code - see cd adapco sponsor label on the crash structure). I think they have some inhouse software for optimisation on cfd.
shelly
 
Joined: 5 May 2009

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:12 pm

So basically it's more important to be able to write your own cfd code than to know some comercial software?
Th0R
 
Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Location: Germany

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:22 pm

It depends on the role you want to fill. But profinecy with a commercial code is usually a prerequsite, as then you have to program extensions or customisations of that code
shelly
 
Joined: 5 May 2009

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:47 pm

Well, the comercial tools i know don't give you that much possibillity to change fundamental parts of the code. For example starCCM+ has its userfunctions but no way the exchange fundamental parts like the solvers. On the other hand programs like openFoam consume a lot of time to set up a simulation, but of course here you can do what you want with your code.

And if you think about it there are not many aspects which would justify developing your own code (because commercial tools have them covered pretty well)
Th0R
 
Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Location: Germany

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:57 pm

Agree with you. Most of the work is done via commerial codes
shelly
 
Joined: 5 May 2009

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 6:29 pm

Most important to just be a sharp engineer, know your stuff and be able to react to things.
Grip is a four letter word.

2 is the new #1.
Jersey Tom
 
Joined: 29 May 2006
Location: Huntersville, NC

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 6:52 pm

Jersey Tom wrote:Most important to just be a sharp engineer, know your stuff and be able to react to things.


But that's more a personal skill than a technical one.... And you know you dont need to be an engineer to do cfd ...
Th0R
 
Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Location: Germany

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:22 pm

Th0R wrote:And you know you dont need to be an engineer to do cfd ...


Any clown can run the software.


However, it takes quite a skilled clown* to run the software properly, ensure they are running the software correctly and also interpret the results correctly. :)



*such clowns would typically need mathematics, physics or appropriate engineering training in the circus before being sufficiently skilled to undertake any task to any useful end. :D
kilcoo316
 
Joined: 9 Mar 2005
Location: Kilcoo, Ireland

Post Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:35 pm

I was just aiming for the different backgrounds. I myself have more an applied mathematics / computer science background and would never dare to call me an engineer (but i'm planing to become one), but i can mostly tell you what's happening inside the cfd code. I know nothing about constructing things or materials or even producing things.

The thing is you always need a team to build such complex projects like a formula one car. Even Newey didn't design the RBRs by himself. And there are a lot of people in a team which aren't engineers.


And i love colorful pictures ;)
Th0R
 
Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Location: Germany

Post Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:10 am

I am very interested in giving a try to CFD analyses. Although I didn't have any experience with it, I have been learning mathematics, can you give me some pieces of advice how to start it and which program to use? Thank you!
BalazsSzabo
 
Joined: 21 Mar 2012

Post Fri Mar 23, 2012 12:15 am

I met THE top guy of CFD of Ferrari-F1 and I can tell you he isn't a monkey running code thrown at him. I asked him how he landed what in my opinion is just about the most cutting edge job that exists. He learned the ins and outs of aerodynamics and numerical methods. He didn't learn how to just use them, he completely understood them.

If you guys want to really know CFD, get Matlab or some equivalent and start writing simplified 2d solvers, even 1D. Start eliminating simplifying assumptions (If you've seen my website, you've seen how many simplifying newb like assumptions I make) used in your model. Work on increasing convergence, estimating boundary conditions, learn the nitty gritty numerical methods and in his words "Keep fighting"

I might have to just start a thread for that, as this may be detracting from the oringinal topic which was Russ and I and a few others just running code we didn't really understand.

By the way, if anyone knows how to get ahold of Russ please let me know. Thanks, and hope this post helps.
Keith Young
http://racingtech.wordpress.com
keith dot a dot young at comcast dot net
geocities.com/rough_wood (now closed)
rough_wood
 
Joined: 2 Jul 2003
Location: Engineering School

PreviousNext

Return to Aerodynamics, chassis and tyres

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: WilO and 4 guests